[0:22] >> COUNCIL MEMBER GOOD AFTERNOON, THIS IS THE [0:27] APRIL 24TH, THIS IS THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REGULAR MEETING. I'LL NOW CALL THIS [0:33] MEETING TO ORDER AND ASK THE CLERK TO CALL THE ROLL SO WE MAY [0:39] VERIFY THE PRESENCE OF A QUORUM. >> CALLAHAN IS ABSENT. HUTCHENS. [0:48] >> HERE. >> INGRAHAM. >> AYE. >> PERRY. >> HERE. >> SMRIKAROVA IS ABSENT. WANG. [0:56] >> HERE. >> WE HAVE FIVE MEMBERS PRESENT. >> THANK YOU. LET THE RECORD SHOW WE DO HAVE QUORUM. WITH [1:02] THAT, WE'LL PROCEED TO OUR AGENDA. A COPY OF WHICH WAS POSTED TO PUBLIC ACCESS [1:12] AVAILABLE AT LIMS. IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS AGENDA? >> SO MOVED. >> SECOND. >> IT'S MOVED AND SECONDED. IS [1:20] THERE ANY DISCUSSION IN THE MOTION? HEARING NONE. [1:27] >> AYE. >> ANY AGAINST, INDICATE BY SAYING NO. THAT MOTION PASSES AND THE AGENDA IS APPROVED. I [1:32] BELIEVE ALL THE BOARD MEMBERS HAVE SEEN A COPY OF THE MINUTES FROM THE APRIL 10, 2025, BOARD [1:40] OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING. >> SO MOVED. >> IS THERE A SECOND? IS THERE A [1:47] DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? HEARING NONE, ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION INDICATE BY SAYING [1:55] AYE. >> AYE. >> ANY ABSTENTIONS? IF YOU WEREN'T HERE, PLEASE ABSTAIN. WITH THAT, THE MOTION PASSES AND [2:02] THE MINUTES FOR THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, APRIL 10, 2025, [2:08] MEETING ARE APPROVED. MR. ELLIS, ARE THERE ANY PETITIONS OR [2:14] COMMUNICATIONS? >> THERE ARE NO PETITIONS OR COMMUNICATIONS THIS EVENING. >> ALL RIGHT. LET'S REVIEW THE [2:20] AGENDA. I'LL TALK ABOUT WHAT DISCUSSIONS ITEMS ARE. THESE ARE [2:26] ITEMS FOR THE BOARD WILL TAKE PUBLIC TESTIMONY, DELIBERATE ON [2:31] AND MAKE A DECISION. AFTER THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY HAS BEEN HEARD [2:36] FOR EACH DISCUSSION ITEM, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR THAT AGENDA ITEM. ONCE I CLOSE, [2:45] NO ADDITIONAL WILL BE TAKEN. BUT [2:50] STAFF MAY ADDRESS QUESTIONS. BOARD MEMBERS WILL THEN DISCUSS AND ACT ON MOTIONS. AND THE CHAIR ONLY VOTES IN THE CASE OF [2:56] A TIE. WE HAVE ONE LAND USE REQUEST ITEM ON OUR AGENDA. [3:03] AGENDA ITEM 5. 5728 OLIVER AVENUE SOUTH. THIS IS A DISCUSSION ITEM. WE HAVE NO [3:11] CONSENT ITEMS TO CONSIDER. AND SO LET'S MOVE ON WITH AGENDA [3:19] ITEM 5. MR. CARRIER. [3:26] >> GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR PERRY, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD. ITEM 5 IS [3:32] A VARIOUS REQUEST TO REDUCE THE REQUIRED INTERIOR SIDE YARD FOR [3:37] THE ADDITION OF AN ATTACHED GARAGE AT 5728 OLIVER AVENUE [3:44] SOUTH. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS [3:51] IN THE UN3 URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD DISTRICT AND BFC3 KOR DOOR [4:01] OVERLAY DISTRICT. 7,909 SQUARE FEET IN AREA. THE EAST FRONT PROPERTY LINE CURVES OUTWARD AND [4:08] RUNS ALONG OLIVER AVENUE SOUTH APPROXIMATELY 85 FEET. THE LOT [4:13] TAPERS AND NARROWS TOWARDS THE WEST REAR PROPERTY LINE WHICH RUNS APPROXIMATELY 45 FEET. THE [4:20] EXISTING PRINCIPLE USE IS A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING WITH AN ATTACHED GARAGE FACING THE FRONT [4:25] LOT LINE. IMPROVEMENTS ON THE PROPERTY INCLUDE A TWO-STORY SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING, TWO [4:34] CONCRETE PATIOS, TWO AT GRADE DECKS, WALKWAYS, RETAING WALL, [4:40] AND DRIVEWAY ACCESSIBLE FROM SOUTH. THERE IS NO ALLEY. THE [4:47] APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO CONSTRUCT ADDITIONS TO THE EXISTING CENTER UK -- [4:58] STRUCTURE. -- TO MATCH THE NEW GARAGE ENTRANCE. THE EXISTING STRUCTURE INCLUDES AN ATTACHED [5:05] SINGLE STALL GARAGE THAT DOES NOT CURRENTLY CONFORM TO THE ORDINANCE'S YARD REQUIREMENTS [5:10] WITH THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE STRUCTURE SLIGHTLY LESS THAN THE REQUIRED MINIMUM FIVE FEET FROM [5:16] THE INTERIOR SIDE PROPERTY LINE. THE PROPOSED ADDITION MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS FOR ATTACHED [5:22] ACCESSORY USES DESIGNED FOR THE PARKING OF VEHICLES. WHICH SHALL [5:27] EXTEND NO MORE THAN FIVE FEET CLOSER TO THE FRONT LOT LINE AND [5:32] THE FACADE OF THE FIRST STORY. THE WIDTH OF THE GARAGE WALL [5:40] FACING THE FRONT LOT LINE DOES NOT EXCEED THE WIDTH OF THE [5:47] STRUCTURE. REDUCE THE INTERIOR SIDE SETBACK FROM FIVE FEET TO 1.2 FEET. SO THE APPLICANT IS [5:54] REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO REDUCE THE REQUIRED INTERIOR SIDE YARD FROM FIVE FEET TO 1.2 FEET. AT [6:01] THE TIME OF THIS HEARING, THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT HAS [6:06] RECEIVED NO PUBLIC COMMENT. THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT HAS ANALYZED THE APPLICATION TO VARY [6:13] THE YARD REQUIREMENTS BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS. [6:18] CHALLENGES EXIST IN COMPLYING WITH THE ORDINANCE BECAUSE OF CIRCUMSTANCES UNIQUE TO THE PROPERTY. THE UNIQUE [6:26] CIRCUMSTANCES WERE NOT CREATED BY THE PERSONS PRESENTLY HAVE AN INTEREST IN THE PROPERTY AND ARE NOT BASED IN ECONOMIC [6:31] CONSIDERATIONS ALONE. THIS [6:36] PARCEL DOES HAVE AN UNUSUAL SHAPE AND LACKS ALLEY ACCESS, WHICH ARE SOMEWHAT UNIQUE [6:43] CIRCUMSTANCES. HOWEVER, THESE CIRCUMSTANCES DO NOT CREATE A PRACTICAL DIFFICULTY IN [6:48] COMPLYING WITH THE ORDINANCE'S YARD REQUIREMENTS. IT'S POSSIBLE TO CONSTRUCT ADDITIONS OF AN [6:54] ATTACHED GARAGE AND SECOND STORY THAT WOULD COMPLY WITH THE ORDINANCE'S YARD REQUIREMENTS. [6:59] ALTERNATIVE DESIGNS COULD ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO CONSTRUCT A LARGER ATTACHED GARAGE WHILE MAINTAINING AT LEAST A FIVE-FOOT [7:07] SETBACK FROM THE INTERIOR SITE PROPERTY LINE. THIS FINDING IS NOT MET. THE PROPERTY OWNER OR [7:16] AUTHORIZED APPLICANT PROPOSES TO USE THE PROPERTY IN A REASONABLE MANNER THAT WILL BE IN KEEPING WITH THE SPIRIT AND INTENT OF [7:22] THE ORDINANCE. AND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THE CONTINUED USE OF THE PROPERTY AS [7:27] A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING IS IN KEEPING WITH THE SPIRIT AND INTENT OF THE ORDINANCE AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. BUT THE [7:34] PROPOSED ADDITION DOES NOT ALIGN WITH THE APPLICABLE GLIDANCE AND [7:39] POLICIES RELATED TO THE FORM. YARD CONTROLS PROVIDE FOR [7:45] ORDERLY DEVELOPMENT OF USE LAND AND LIMIT CONFLICTS AMONG LAND USES BY LIMITING THE DIMENSION [7:52] AND USE OF YARDS IN ORDER TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE LIGHT, AIR, OPEN SPACE AND SEPARATION OF [8:00] USES. YARD CONTROLS ALSO PLAY A ROLE IN STORMWATER MANAGEMENT, DEFINING PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SPACES, AND CREATING A LANDSCAPE [8:08] BUFFER FOR GROUND LEVEL RESIDENTIAL USES. THEIR REQUEST TO REDUCE YARD REQUIREMENTS TO [8:13] 1.2 FEET IS UNREASONABLE CONSIDERING ALTERNATIVE DESIGN OPTIONS CAN REASONABLY COMPLY WITH THE APPLICABLE GUIDANCE AND [8:21] BUILT FORM STANDARDS OF THE ORDINANCE AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THIS FINDING IS NOT MET. [8:30] AND FINALLY, THE PROPOSED VARIANCE WILL NOT ALTER THE [8:35] CHARACTER OF THE LOCALITY OR USE OR ENJOYMENT OF OTHERS IN THE PROPERTY AND VICINITY. WILL NOT [8:43] BE DETRIMENTAL OF THE HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE [8:49] GENERAL PUBLIC. THE REQUEST TO REDUCE THE REQUIRED INTERIOR SIDE YARD TO 1.2 FEET WOULD [8:56] ALTER THE CHARACTER OF THE LOCALITY. IF GRANTED, THE PROPOSED VARIANCE WOULD BE [9:01] DETRIMENTAL TO THE HEALTH, SAFETY OR WELFARE. IN ADDITION TO THE ROLE, YARD REQUIREMENTS, [9:09] STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AND PROVIDING ADEQUATE LIGHT AND AIR, THESE REQUIREMENTS ALSO [9:15] SUPPORT EMERGENCY RESPONSES BY MAINTAINING ADEQUATE SPACE BETWEEN DEVELOPMENT, ESPECIALLY [9:20] ON PARCELS WITH A LACK OF ALLEY ACCESS. THIS FINDING IS NOT MET. THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. [9:31] THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT RECOMMENDS THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ADOPT STAFF FINDINGS AND DENY THE VARIANCE REQUEST TO REDUCE [9:39] THE REQUIRED INTERIOR SIDE YARD AT 5728 OLIVER AVENUE SOUTH FROM [9:44] 5 FEET TO 1.2 FEET. THANK YOU. >> THANKS FOR YOUR PRESENTATION. [9:51] ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF? YES. [10:01] >> THANKS, CHAIR. WHAT ABOUT THIS PROJECT IMPEDES THE HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THOSE [10:07] SURROUNDING PROPERTIES? IT LOOKS PRETTY SIMILAR TO OTHER PROPERTIES ADJACENT TO IT AND ON THE SAME BLOCK. WHAT ABOUT THIS [10:14] IS NOT IN CHARACTER WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND ACTUALLY GOING TO IMPEDE SOMEONE'S HEALTH [10:19] SAFETY? >> CHAIR PERRY, BOARD MEMBER, [10:26] THE DISCUSSION WE'VE HAD AMONGST ZONING STAFF IS RELATED TO [10:32] EMERGENCY RESPONSE. WE DIDN'T HAVE REVIEW OF EMERGENCY RESPONSE OR THE FIRE DEPARTMENT [10:37] OR ANYTHING. BUT REDUCING THE REQUIRED YARD FROM 5-FEET TO 1.2 [10:43] FEET WHERE THERE'S NO ALLEY ACCESS, I KNOW FOR OTHER PERMITTED OBSTRUCTIONS THE MOST [10:51] IT COULD BE IS TWO FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE. AND ONE REASON IS [10:57] TO ALLOW FOR ADEQUATE ACCESS TO EMERGENCY RESPONDERS. [11:03] >>KAY. >> YES. CHAIR PERRY, BOARD [11:08] MEMBER HUTCHENS. I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS TO BEAR IN MIND, STAFF'S DOING SOMETHING ON THE [11:15] ANALYSIS THAT THE OTHER PROPERTY OWNER COULD DO SOMETHING. SO THAT'S SOMETHING TO TAKE INTO [11:21] CONSIDERATION. IT WOULDN'T NECESSARILY BE OPEN ON THE OTHER PROPERTY AROUND THE STRUCTURE. SO THAT'S KIND OF ONE OF THE [11:26] CONSIDERATIONS. WHICH IS WHY THAT FINDING IS DONE IN THE WAY IT IS. BUT YOU KNOW, YOU COULD [11:31] CERTAINLY FIND OTHER THINGS ON YOUR END. BUT THAT'S ONE OF THE [11:37] RATIONALES BEHIND STAFF'S THOUGHT PROCESS. >> CAN I ASK A FOLLOW UP THEN? >> ABSOLUTELY. >> ARE YOU ABLE TO GIVE YOUR [11:49] LAPTOP TO PULL UP THE PLOT ESSENTIALLY. I THINK THE [11:55] ADJACENT PROPERTY IS MUCH CLOSER. AM I WRONG? >> CHAIR PERRY, BOARD MEMBER, THIS -- [12:00] >> DO YOU HAVE THE PLAN VIEW OF IT? >> YEAH. I'LL HAVE TO USE THIS [12:06] OTHER GADGET. OKAY. [12:26] >> MY CURIOSITY HITS ME BECAUSE THERE'S ANOTHER ACCESS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE HOUSE. SO IF [12:34] IT'S ABOUT ACCESS, THERE'S ACCESS. JUST ABOUT AS MUCH AS [12:39] ANYBODY NEARBY. [12:47] >> IS THAT VISIBLE FOR YOU? >> YEAH. ESSENTIALLY I'M JUST MAKING THE CASE THAT I'M CURIOUS [12:53] WHY IN AN EMERGENCY RESPONSE CONSIDERATION, I HEAR YOU ON [12:59] THAT, THE I BELIEVE NORTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY HAS PLENTY WIDE ENOUGH WAY FOR EMERGENCY ACCESS [13:08] AND RESPONSE. IT'S VERY SIMILAR TO THE ONE JUST TO THE SOUTH OF IT. [13:13] >> YES, IT IS. >> OKAY. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF? [13:22] I SEE NONE. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> WE MAY HAVE YOU UP AGAIN. [13:30] LET'S OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THE APPLICATION? SUCH [13:36] AS THE APPLICANT. >> YES, SIR. >> OKAY. IF YOU COULD GIVE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, [13:41] PLEASE. >> GOOD EVENING, MY NAME IS MARK [13:52] HENNESSY, THE OWNER OF 5728 OLIVER AVENUE SOUTH. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. GO AHEAD. [13:58] >> THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE MY COUNTER POINT TO THE STAFF FINDINGS. I WOULD LIKE [14:04] TO THANK BEN CARRIER WHO HAS BEEN EXTREMELY PROFESSIONAL AND HELPFUL IN NAVIGATING THIS PROCESS. I'M THE ONLY ONE HERE, [14:11] BUT IN AN EFFORT TO BE RESPECTFUL OF EVERYONE'S TIME, I MADE COMMENTS WITHIN THE [14:16] VARIANCE STAFF REPORT PROVIDED BY BEN. I FELT THIS WAS THE MOST EFFICIENT AND ORGANIZED WAY TO [14:23] PROVIDE TALKING POINTS FOR SUPPORT OF MY PROJECT. I HAVE PREPARED HANDOUTS FOR THE BOARD TO FOLLOW ALONG. COULD I PASS [14:31] THOSE OUT? >> SURE. IF YOU COULD HAND THEM TO THE CLERK. [15:02] >> I'LL BE ADDRESSING TWO AREAS WITHIN THE ANALYSIS SECTION OF THE REPORT AND WILL BE READING [15:09] THE FINDING COMMENTS AND PROVIDING A REBUTTAL FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. THE SECOND HANDOUT PROVIDES EXAMPLES OF [15:15] SIMILAR PROJECTS. I WILL CONCLUDE BY BRIEFLY REVIEWING THOSE EXAMPLES. WHEN EVERYONE [15:21] GETS IT, COULD YOU PLEASE TURN TO THE BLUE TAB. AND IT'S ON THE BACK SIDE OF THAT BLUE TAB OR [15:28] THE CONTENT THAT I'LL BE REFERENCING. >> MM-HMM. >> THE BLUE IS JUST HIGHLIGHTED [15:34] COPY FROM BEN'S REPORT OF THE FINDINGS. YARD CONTROL PROVIDE [15:40] FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AND USE OF LAND AND TO MINIMIZE CONTENT -- [15:46] USE OF YARD IN ORDER TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE LIGHT, AIR. YARD [15:52] CONTROLS ALSO PLAY A ROLE IN STORMWATER MANAGEMENT. CREATING A LANDSCAPE BUFFER FOR GROUND [15:58] AND LEVEL RESIDENTIAL USES. THE REQUEST TO REDUCE YARD REQUIREMENTS TO 1.2 FEET IS [16:04] UNREASONABLE CONSIDERING ALTERNATIVE DESIGN OPTIONS CAN REASONABLY COMPLY WITH THE [16:09] APPLICATION GUIDANCE AND BUILT FORM STANDARDS OF THE ORDINANCE AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THE [16:15] FINDING IS NOT MET. MY RESPONSES TO THOSE COMMENTS. NO CONFLICTS WITH OUR PROPERTIES HAVE BEEN [16:22] IDENTIFIED. IN FACT, MY NEIGHBOR AT 5736 OLIVER APPLIED FOR THE [16:28] SAME VARIANCE AND WAS GRANTED PERMISSION. I RECEIVED THE NOTICE AND I HAD NO REASON TO [16:35] OBJECT. NOW I'M ASKING THE SAME CONSIDERATION IN MAKING IMPROVEMENTS TO MY HOME. STORM [16:42] WATER MANAGEMENT WILL NOT BE ALTERED. CURRENTLY WATER FLOWS FROM NORTH TO SOUTH IN A SWELL. [16:49] THIS WAS THE ORIGINAL TOPOGRAPHY OF THE DEVELOPMENT IN 1947 AND [16:55] CONTINUES TO FUNCTION PROPERLY TO THIS DATE. ALTERNATIVE DESIGN OPTIONS ARE NOT AVAILABLE TO [17:01] ACCOMMODATE A STANDARD TWO-CAR SIDE BY SIDE GARAGE CONSIDERING THE UNIQUE PARAMETERS OF MY LOT. [17:07] THERE IS NO WAY TO PROVIDE A TWO-CAR GARAGE. WE'VE IDENTIFIED [17:14] ARCHITECTURELY AND WITH A SURVEY THAT WE HAVE NO OTHER OPTIONS. THE PROJECT WILL NOT IMPACT AIR [17:20] FLOW. OUR WEDGE SHAPE ALLOWS MORE AIR FLOW THAN TYPICAL. [17:26] SIMILARLY, LIGHT WILL ALSO NOT BE AFFECTED AS A RESULT BECAUSE OUR HOUSES ARE SET ASKEW OF THE [17:31] TRADITIONAL EAST-WEST GRIDLINES. UNIQUE CHARACTERISTICS OF OUR LOT THAT SUPPORT THE USE OF A VARIANCE. THERE IS NO ALLEY [17:39] ACCESS. THIS IS VERY UNIQUE CONDITION IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. [17:46] ALLEY ACCESS ALLOWS FOR SETBACK REDUCTIONS. ZONING ORDINANCE HAS [17:53] DIFFERENT STANDARDS. THE INTERIOR SIDE YARD REQUIREMENTS MAY BE REDUCED BY ONE FOOT WHEN [17:59] THE ENTIRE ACCESSORY BUILDING IS LOCATED ON THE REAR 40-FEET, AND THE REAR 20% OF THE LOT, [18:06] WHICHEVER IS GREATER. PROVIDED THAT THE ACCESSORY BUILDING SHOULD BE LOCATED NOT LESS [18:12] THAN -- OF THE PRINCIPLE STRUCTURE OF THE ADJOINING LOT. THE UNIQUENESS OF THE LOT AND NO [18:20] ALLEY ACCESS PRECLUDES US. WE ARE ONE OF THE ONLY BLOCKS IN [18:27] ARMITAGE THAT HAVE WEDGE-SHAPED BLOCKS. THIS IS A UNIQUE [18:33] CHARACTERISTIC. I'M NOT BASING THIS VARIANCE REQUEST ON [18:38] ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS. TO THE CONTRARY. I'M PROPOSING INVESTING A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF MONEY INTO OUR HOME. IF THE [18:45] PROPOSED PROJECT IS APPROVED, THIS WILL ONLY ADD VALUE TO OUR HOME AND THOSE IN THE [18:50] NEIGHBORHOOD. THE ONE-CAR GARAGE. IN 1947 WHEN OUR HOUSE [18:57] WAS BUILT, MOST FAMILIES HAD ONE CAR. -- ACCOMMODATE MODERN [19:03] NEEDS. THE MAJORITY OF HOMES IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD HAVE UPDATED TO TWO CAR GARAGES. THERE IS [19:10] CLEARLY AN ACCOMMODATION WHICH I'M NOT ABLE TO UTILIZE. EVERY [19:19] QUARTER LAW DOES NOT APPLY TO EVERY PROPERTY. THE VARIANCE PROCESS PROVIDES THE BALANCE TO [19:24] THIS PROCESS. BY DEFINITION, VARIANCES ARE INTENDED TO PROVIDE FLEXIBILITY WITHIN THE [19:31] RIGID FRAMEWORK OF ZONING LAWS. RESPONDS TO UNIQUE [19:36] CIRCUMSTANCES. THEY ENSURE THAT ZONING REGULATIONS DO NOT BECOME [19:41] OVERLY BURDENSOME. EXAMPLES OF [19:47] THE ARMITAGE NEIGHBORHOOD IS OUR HOPE THAT THIS IS DEEMED A [19:52] REASONABLE DEVELOPMENT. THE REQUEST TO REDUCE WOULD ALTER [19:59] THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE LOCALITY. IF GRANTED, THE [20:04] PROPOSED VARIANCE WOULD BE -- OR NEARBY PROPERTIES. IN ADDITION, [20:13] THESE REQUIREMENTS ALSO SUPPORT EMERGENCY RESPONSE BY MAINTAINING ADEQUATE SPACE [20:19] BETWEEN THE DEVELOPMENT, ESPECIALLY ON PARCELS WITH A LACK OF ALLEY ACCESS. THIS FINDING IS NOT MET. THE [20:25] APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE WOULD NOT ALTER THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER OR BE DETRIMENTAL TO MY NEIGHBORS. MY NEIGHBOR TWO [20:33] HOUSES SOUTH OF MY ADDRESS APPLIED FOR THE SAME VARIANCE I'M APPLYING FOR AND WAS [20:39] GRANTED. THERE ARE NO NEGATIVE RESPONSES FROM THE NEIGHBORS. AND THE CONSTRUCTION HAS NOT EXHIBITED ANY DETRIMENT TO THE [20:45] QUALITY OF LIFE AS A RESULT. HEALTH. NO ADVERSE HEALTH ISSUES HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED. SAFETY. [20:51] THERE WAS NO THREAT TO SAFETY OR ACCESS FOR EMERGENCY RESPONSE. LIKE MY NEIGHBOR, I HAVE A FULL [20:56] GATE ON THE NORTH SIDE OF MY PROPERTY WHICH PROVIDES ACCESS TO LIFE SAFETY PERSONNEL. WE'VE [21:04] HAD TREE TRIMMERS USE OUR YARD FOR ACCESS BECAUSE OUR NEIGHBORS [21:09] YARDS DO NOT PROVIDE EASY ACCESS. ADEQUATE LIGHT AND AIR. THE WEDGE SHAPE OF OUR LOT [21:15] PROVIDES MORE SPACE IN BETWEEN BUILDINGS BECAUSE IT GETS LARGER FROM BACK TO FRONT. THIS IS CLEARLY VISIBLE IN THE FOLLOWING [21:22] PHOTOS. THE FOLLOW PHOTOS SHOW MY NEIGHBORS CONDITIONS AND MY [21:28] PROPOSED ADDITION. THE NEXT SHEET I REFERENCE THE HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY MAP SHOWING THE [21:35] PROXIMITY OF MY PROPERTY TO THE EXAMPLE PROPERTY THAT WAS GRANTED THE SAME VARIANCE. MY PROPERTY IS AT 5728, AND MY [21:42] NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY IS TWO LOTS TO THE SOUTH AT 5736. THE NEXT [21:49] SHEET SHOWS THE EXAMPLE OF THE PROPOSED GARAGE THAT WILL BE A MIRROR IMAGE OF WHAT MY NEIGHBOR [21:56] HAS CONSTRUCTED. THE NEXT PAGE. THIS PHOTO SHOWS THE TWO-CAR [22:02] ATTACHED GARAGE ADDITION WHICH IS EXACTLY THE SAME CONDITION AS [22:08] MY VARIANCE REQUESTS. IMPROVES AIR MOVEMENT AND LIGHT EXPOSURE WHICH IS UNIQUE TO OUR BLOCK. IF YOU LOOK CLOSELY AT THE ABOVE [22:16] PICTURE, THE OWNER BUILT A TWO-PLUS GARAGE. MOST LIKELY [22:22] WITHIN THE FIVE-FOOT VARIANCE. IT WAS GRANTED PERMISSION EVEN [22:27] WITHIN THE BONUS SPACE. I AM REQUESTING A VARIANCE TO [22:32] ACCOMMODATE THE MINIMUM INTERIOR DIMENSIONS PRACTICAL FOR A TWO-CAR GARAGE. NEXT PAGE SHOWS [22:37] A PHOTO OF THE CLOSER VIEW OF THE GARAGE IN PROXIMITY TO THE PROPERTY LINE. THE NEXT PHOTO [22:46] SHOWS THE DIMENSIONS FROM THE CORNER OF THEIR GARAGE TO THE [22:51] PROPERTY LINE. WITH A VARIANCE OF ABOUT PLUS OR MINUS ONE INCH. THE PHOTO ON THE BOTTOM SHOWS [22:57] THE GATE ON MY NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY WHICH ALLOWS FOR EMERGENCY ACCESS FOR PERSONNEL AND UTILITIES. THE NEXT PAGE [23:05] SHOWS MY FOUR-FOOT GATE WHICH ALSO ALLOWS FOR UNINCUMBERED [23:11] ACCESS FOR EMERGENCY RESPONDERS. THE SECOND HANDOUT THAT I [23:17] PREPARED ARE JUST OTHER EXAMPLES OF HOMES WITHIN MY NEIGHBORHOOD THAT FROM LOOKING AT THE STREET [23:23] AND NOT GOING ON THE PROPERTY PHYSICALLY TO MEASURE ALSO EXHIBIT ADDITIONS SIMILAR TO [23:30] MINE THAT ARE WITHIN THE FIVE-FOOT SETBACK. FIRST ONE IS [23:36] AT 2105 57th STREET, TWO-CAR ATTACHED GARAGE WITHIN FIVE FEET OF THE PROPERTY SETBACK. THE [23:44] SECOND PAGE IS AT 2116 57th STREET. THERE'S A NEW THREE-CAR [23:49] GARAGE WITHIN THE FIVE-FOOT SETBACK. THE NEXT PAGE IS AN AERIAL VIEW OF THAT SAME [23:56] PROPERTY. NEXT PAGE 2216 57th STREET SOUTH. TWO-CAR ATTACHED, [24:04] DETACHED ADDITION. IT'S NOT ON THE ALLEY WITH LESS THAN FIVE-FOOT SETBACK. THE NEXT PAGE [24:09] SHOWS THE STREET VIEW AND A LITTLE BETTER VIEWPOINT OF THAT LOT LINE ENCROACHMENT. NEXT [24:18] PAGE, 5445 AND 5441-NEWTON AVENUE SOUTH SHOWING EXISTING SINGLE CAR GARAGES WITH NEW [24:24] CONSTRUCTION ADDITIONAL TWO-CAR DETACHED GARAGES. THIS SHOWS HOW LOTS ON ALLEYS HAVE AN APPROVED [24:32] STIPULATION THAT DOES NOT APPLY TO MY UNIQUE LOT. 5710 AND 5714-NEWTON AVENUE SOUTH SHOWING [24:39] TWO CAR ATTACHED ADDITIONS WITHIN THE FIVE-FOOT SETBACK. IT DOES NOT APPEAR THAT THIS [24:45] CONFIGURATION SHOWS AIR, LIGHT, STORMWATER OR 50-FOOT SERVICES. TWO PLUS CAR ADDITION AND A [24:52] BONUS ROOM SIMILAR TO MY PROJECT. THE TWO PLUS CAR SPACE APPEARS TO PUSH THE ADDITION [24:57] WITHIN TWO FEET OF THE PROPERTY LINE. 5710 AND 5714, THE NEXT [25:03] TWO OR THREE PAGES ARE JUST ADDITIONAL ANGLES SHOWING THAT CONDITION. AND THEN LAST EXAMPLE [25:16] IS 5824 QUEEN AVENUE SOUTH, TWO CAR ATTACHED GARAGE ADDITION AERIAL VIEW SHOWING WHAT APPEARS [25:24] TO BE A ZERO LOT SETBACK. THAT IS A PICTURE OF A POOL IN THE BACKYARD. THE FINAL TWO PHOTOS [25:30] ARE SHOWING A DIFFERENT AERIAL VIEW AND THEN THE STREET VIEW OF THAT CONDITION WHICH AGAIN [25:36] APPEARS TO BE A ZERO LOT LINE CONDITION. I'VE BEEN IN THE [25:42] CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY OVER 30 YEARS AND I FULLY UNDERSTAND THE NEED FOR BUILDING CODES AND BUILDING STANDARDS. I ALSO [25:51] UNDERSTAND THE IMPORTANCE OF VARIANCES AND SPECIAL CONDITIONS THAT ARE EXPERIENCED. I'VE APPLIED FOR THIS VARIANCE AND [25:57] WAS RECOMMENDED TO BE DENIED IN THE INITIAL REVIEW PROCESS. I HAVE INVESTED A SUBSTANTIAL [26:02] AMOUNT OF TIME AND MONEY TO GET THIS PROJECT TO THIS POINT AFTER [26:09] WITNESSING LIKE FOR LIKE PROJECTS BEING BUILDED AND COMPLETED IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD. I [26:16] HAVE PROVIDED AN EXPLANATION TO ALL THE STAFF COMMENTS AND SHOWN EXAMPLES OF EXACT AND SIMILAR [26:22] CONDITIONS TWO HOUSES AWAY AND WITHIN MY NEIGHBORHOOD. I HOPE THAT THE INFORMATION I HAVE [26:28] PRESENTED TO YOU THIS EVENING PROVIDES ADDITIONAL INSIGHT AND CONTEXT TO SUPPORT THE PROJECT [26:33] MOVING FORWARD. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION. >> THANKS FOR YOUR PRESENTATION. [26:42] ANY QUESTIONS OF MR. HENESSY? YEAH. >> I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY SOMETHING. IN THE STAFF REPORT [26:49] FOR VARIANCE, CHALLENGE ONE, THAT WAS SET, YOU KNOW, IT IS POSSIBLE TO CONSTRUCT ADDITIONS [26:54] THAT WOULD COMPLY WITH AN ORDINANCE YARD REQUIREMENTS. I WAS CURIOUS TO HEAR YOUR RESPONSE ABOUT THAT. [27:00] >> YEAH. SO IN ORDER TO GET A TWO-CAR GARAGE YOU NEED AT LEAST 20 FEET WIDE TO DO THAT. WE [27:06] CANNOT DO THAT WITHOUT THE VARIANCE. AND TO DO ANYTHING LESS THAN 20 FEET IS NOT A TWO [27:11] CAR GARAGE AT THAT POINT. IT'S A ONE CAR GARAGE AND IT BECOMES FINANCIALLY NOT FEASIBLE TO [27:17] INVEST THAT KIND OF MONEY WITHOUT HAVING THE ABILITY TO PUT TWO CARS IN THERE. >> THANK YOU. [27:23] >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? YES. >> THANKS, CHAIR PERRY. THANKS [27:29] FOR YOUR REPORT. SUPER DETAILED. I THINK YOU MAKE A GOOD CASE. MORE COMMENT THAN A QUESTION. [27:35] BUT GOOD CASE. APPRECIATE IT. >> THANK YOU. >> ANYONE ELSE? I DON'T SEE [27:41] ANYONE. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME TONIGHT. I REALLY APPRECIATE IT. >> OKAY. SINCE THIS IS THE ONLY [27:47] PERSON IN THE AUDIENCE, WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. AND [27:57] COMMENT. I'D ACTUALLY LIKE TO [28:03] ASK STAFF A QUESTION IF I COULD. [28:09] MR. HENNESSEY IS SAYING HE CAN'T REALLY BUILD WHAT HE NEEDS TO -- [28:14] HE WOULD LIKE TO, I SHOULDN'T SAY NEED. THIS TWO CAR GARAGE. [28:20] STAFF IS SAYING THAT IT IS ACTUALLY POSSIBLE TO DO THAT. CAN YOU HELP US FIGURE THAT OUT? [28:28] >> YEAH. CHAIR PERRY, THANK YOU FOR THE QUESTION. STAFF'S [28:36] CONSIDERATION WAS YOU COULD MEET THE FIVE-YARD REQUIRED SETBACK BY COMPROMISING LIVING SPACE. BY [28:44] ALTERING THE DESIGN THAT WAY. >> OKAY. >> YEAH. >> ALL RIGHT. AND JUST AS A [28:50] REMINDER TO US, THE REQUIREMENT IN A SINGLE FAMILY HOME IS ONE CAR OR IS IT ANY CAR? ANY [28:59] PARKING SPOT? >> NO. NO PARKING REQUIREMENT. >> THERE'S NO PARKING REQUIREMENT. OKAY. >> RIGHT. [29:05] >> OKAY. YUP. THAT CHANGE. YES. [29:12] >> I'LL TAKE A WHACK AT A MOTION IF YOU'RE INTERESTED. >> SURE. >> NOTWITHSTANDING STAFF FINDINGS, I WOULD MAKE A MOTION [29:21] TO APPROVE THE VARIANCE REQUEST. VARIANCE FINDING NUMBER ONE WITH [29:27] THE FINDINGS, THE PARCEL JUST LIKE THE STAFF REPORT CALLS OUT HAS AN INUSUAL SHAPE. LACKS [29:34] ALLEY ACCESS. WHICH IT SAYS IT'S NOT A UNIQUE OF CIRCUMSTANCE. I WOULD SAY IT IS A PRETTY UNIQUE [29:41] CIRCUMSTANCE COUPLE THAT WITH THE CURVATURE OF THE LOT LINE. [29:46] LARGE TREE ASSOCIATED AND THE HOME'S POSITION ON THE PROPERTY. IT IS SKEWED 1940s BUILD. SKEWED [29:54] TO ONE SIDE OF THE PROPERTY. I THINK ALL THOSE THREE THINGS PUT TOGETHER IS A UNIQUE [29:59] CIRCUMSTANCE FOR THAT PROPERTY. [30:05] FINDING TWO ABOUT E -- I LOST HERE. SPIRIT AND INTENT. I THINK [30:15] IT IS IN THE SPIRIT AND -- I DON'T THINK IT FLIES IN THE FACE [30:21] OF THE INTENT OF THAT REGULATION BECAUSE I DON'T THINK CHANGING IT TO WHAT HE'S ASKING FOR IS [30:27] ACTUALLY GOING TO DO WHAT THE VARIANCE OR WHAT THE CODE IS ASKING FOR IT TO DO. I THINK THERE STILL IS ROOM FOR THE [30:34] SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS. I DON'T THINK IT IMPEDES HIS NEIGHBORS IN ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM. AND I THINK FOR FINDING THREE, I THINK [30:40] IT'S COMPLETELY REASONABLE TO DO WHAT HE'S DOING. I DON'T THINK IT AFFECTS THE CHARACTER [30:45] WHATSOEVER. LOOKING AT GOOGLE MAPS AS WE'RE SITTING HERE. JUST AS THE APPLICANT STATES, THERE [30:52] ARE NUMEROUS PROPERTIES IN THE SAME NEIGHBORHOOD ESSENTIALLY IDENTICAL TO WHAT HE'S ASKING FOR HERE. THOSE ARE MY THREE [30:58] ATTEMPTS. AND I'D LOVE TO HEAR ANYBODY'S COMMENTS ON IT. >> OKAY. SO THAT'S A MOTION. BEFORE WE GET COMMENT, IS THERE [31:03] A SECOND? >> I'LL SECOND. >> AND THERE'S A SECOND. AND I [31:14] WOULD ASK FOR COMMENTS ON THE MOTION. IF THERE ARE ANY. AND [31:25] HEARING NONE, I WILL ASK THE CLERK TO CALL THE ROLL. [31:33] >> I THOUGHT THERE'D BE MORE COMMENTS. EXCUSE ME. BOARD MEMBER EICHOLZ. [31:39] >> AYE. >> HUTCHENS. >> AYE. >> INGRAHAM. >> AYE. [31:45] >> WANG. >> AYE. >> CHAIR PERRY. >> I DON'T VOTE. [31:50] >> OH, THAT'S RIGHT. IN CASE OF A TIE. SO WE HAVE FOUR AYES AND [31:56] ZERO NAYS. EXCUSE ME. >> GREAT. SO YOUR REQUEST IS APPROVED. GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR [32:03] PROJECT. THANKS FOR COMING DOWNTOWN. [32:15] >> OKAY. GREAT. AGAIN, THANKS FOR COMING DOWN. LET'S SEE. ARE [32:24] THERE ANY OTHER MATTERS TO COME BEFORE THE BOARD? SEEING NONE, OUR NEXT MEETING IS MAY 8TH OF [32:30] THIS YEAR. IS THERE A MOTION TO ADJOURN? >> SO MOVED. [32:36] >> SECOND. >> AND IT'S SECONDED. ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION INDICATE BY SAYING AYE. >> AYE. >> WE ARE ADJOURNED.